- No category
CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Course Material
advertisement
CTR 620 PEPS Consultant Selection May 2022 CTR620 Provider Selection Table of Contents Introduction Module 1: Laws & Background A. Federal and State Laws & Regulations B. Contract Types and Funding Sources C. Procurement Planning Module 2: Contracting Overview A. Contracting Process Overview B. Developing the Scope of Work Module 3: Consultant Selection Teams A. Consultant Selection Teams B. Team Building Module 4: Solicitations A. Solicitation Process Overview B. Request for Proposal C. Request for Qualifications Module 5: Provider Response & Evaluation A. Provider Response B. Short List Evaluation Module 6: Finalizing Selections INSTRUCTOR BIOGRAPHIES Dan Neal, P.E., P.G., CTCM Section Director, PEPS Center of Excellence As the Section Director of COE, Dan is responsible for the development, implementation, and improvement of the program and support for TxDOT’s qualifications-based engineering, surveying, and architecture contracts. Dan previously worked for TxDOT’s Environmental Affairs Division and the Texas Water Commission and its successor agencies. Dan holds a Bachelor of Science in Petroleum Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin. He is a licensed professional engineer, a licensed professional geoscientist, a licensed Leaking Petroleum Storage Tank Corrective Action Project Manager, a Certified Texas Procurement Manager, and a Certified Texas Contract Manager. Tommie Bolden, P.E. Continuous Improvement Project Manager Tommie joined the PEPS Center of Excellence in April 2021after working 2 years with the Dallas District – Denton Area office. Tommie started his career with TxDOT in January 2016 in the PEPS Dallas Service Center as a procurement engineer. Prior to TxDOT, he worked for over 5 years in the municipal sector and 11 plus years in the private sector working on various engineering design projects. Tommie holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from Mississippi State University in Starkville, MS. Heather Evans, CTCM Training Coordinator / Instructor Heather Evans joined the PEPS Division in May 2014 as an Instructor and Training Coordinator. She is responsible for the development, implementation, facilitation, and delivery of PEPS-related training activities. Heather previously worked for TxDOT’s Environmental Affairs Division and with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Communication from Purdue University and is also a Certified Texas Contract Manager. Stacy James, P.E. Portfolio Project Manager Stacy joined PEPS in May 2015 after more than 23 years working on design, project management, construction, and maintenance for the South Travis/Hays County Area Office of TxDOT’s Austin District. Stacy provides support to the PEPSCOE Manager, coordinates with other PEP-COE staff in the development, maintenance, and improvement of systems and tools supporting the PEPS program and routine processes. Stacy holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from Texas A&M University. Martha Juch, P.E. Portfolio Project Manager Martha joined TxDOT in April of 2015. She provides support to the PEPS COE Manager and coordinates with other PEPS COE staff in the support of the section’s programs and goals. She has over thirty years of experience in the public and private sector, working as a water resources engineer and planning manager for her own firm, international consulting firms, and the Harris County Flood Control District. Martha holds a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from Texas A&M University, a Master of Science in Environmental Engineering from Rice University, and a Master of Engineering in Civil Engineering from Texas A&M University. Martha is a licensed Professional Engineer, a Certified Floodplain Manager, and a certified Diplomate - Water Resources Engineer. Angela Kissel, MAGeo, ITIL® Training Coordinator / Instructor Angela joined TxDOT in September 2017. She is responsible for the development, implementation, facilitation, and delivery of PEPS-related training activities. Angela has experience conducting various forms of training, such as information technology (IT), geographic information systems (GIS), business processes, accessibility, and leadership. Angela holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Geography and a Master of Applied Geography degree in Environmental Geography from Texas State University. Levi L. Pavia, P.E. Continuous Improvement Project Manager, PEPS - Center of Excellence Levi joined TxDOT in January 2008 working 13 ½ years in survey, construction, maintenance, design, and project management at the El Paso District. Prior to TxDOT, he collectively worked for 10 years with El Paso Water Utilities, Lower Valley Water District, and the City of Socorro as a project manager, GIS specialist, and designer. Levi holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from University of Texas at El Paso. Steven Rugge, P.E. | Continuous Improvement Project Manager, PEPS - Center of Excellence Steven joined PEPS in August 2018 after over 2½ years with the Construction Division (CST). Prior to TxDOT, he worked for over 10½ years for NJDOT’s Region South Construction Section as a project manager on construction and maintenance projects. Steven holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from Rowan University in Glassboro, NJ. Acronyms Term Definition BCM Business Case Memo CEI Construction Engineering Inspection CFR Code of Federal Regulations CLM Contract Lifecycle Management COE Center of Excellence CPFF Cost Plus Fixed Fee CS Contract Specialist CSD Contract Services Division CSJ Control Section Job CST Consultant Selection Team CUF Commercially Useful Function DBE Disadvantaged Business Enterprise D/D District or Division DD Division Director DE District Engineer E&O Errors and Omissions ED Executive Director EDMS Electronic Document Management System ESA Evaluation Score Average FC Function Code FCP Final Cost Proposal FHWA Federal Highway Administration GEC General Engineering Consultant HSP Historically Underutilized Business Subcontracting Plan HUB Historically Underutilized Business ICG Interview and Contract Guide ICN Identification of Contract Need ID Indefinite Deliverable IE Independent Engineer LOE Level of Effort LS Lump Sum NEF Non-Engineering Firm NLC Non-Listed Category NTE Not to Exceed ODE Other Direct Expense OH Overhead Rate PDF Portable Document Format PEPS Professional Engineering Procurement Services PM Project Manager PMC Program Management Consultant PNR Pre-Negotiation Report PP Prompt Payment PPM Project and Portfolio Management PS&E Plans, Specifications, & Estimates PS-CAMS Professional Services Contract Administration Management System PTC Project Team Composition RFP Request for Proposal RM Routing Memo SA Supplemental Agreement SCM Service Center Manager SD Specific Deliverable SME Subject Matter Expert SR Specified Rate SWA Supplemental Work Authorization TAC Texas Administrative Code TxDOT Texas Department of Transportation UC Unit Cost USC United States Code USDOT United States Department of Transportation WA Work Authorization WBS Work Breakdown Structure Center of Excellence Dan Neal, P.E. 512-416-2667 Dan.Neal@txdot.gov Martha Juch, P.E. 512-416-2263 Martha.Juch@txdot.gov Stacy James, P.E. 512-416-2064 Stacy.James@txdot.gov Steven Rugge, P.E. 512-416-3140 Steven.Rugge@txdot.gov Michelle Veale, P.E. 512-486-5233 Michelle.Veale@txdot.gov Heather Evans 512-416-2711 Heather.Evans@txdot.gov Angela Kissel 512-416-2045 Angela.Kissel@txdot.gov Service Center Managers Austin - Charles Davidson, P.E. 512-832-7315 Charles.Davidson@txdot.gov Dallas - Joe Jancuska, P.E. 214-320-6187 Joseph.Jancuska@txdot.gov El Paso – Jaime Perales, P.E. 915-790-4231 Jaime.Perales@txdot.gov Fort Worth – Jessica Andrews 817-370-3668 Jessica.Andrews@txdot.gov Houston – Kimlinh Nguyen, P.E. 713-802-5799 Kimlinh.Nguyen@txdot.gov San Antonio – Clara Carbajal-Sanchez, P.E. 210-615-5887 Clara.CarbajalSanchez@txdot.gov Urban Districts - Jaime Vela, P.E. 956-712-7730 Jaime.A.Vela@txdot.gov Rural Districts – Lynn Daniel, P.E. 940-937-7281 Lynn.Daniel@txdot.gov Divisions - Kori Rodriguez, P.E. 210-615-5971 Kori.Rodriguez@txdot.gov Negotiations Center - Norma Glasscock, P.E. 817-370-3675 Norma.Glasscock@txdot.gov Invoice Center – Tira Dobrozensky, P.E. 512-486-5227 Tira.Dobrozensky@txdot.gov Control Center – Dione Albert 512-416-2003 Dione.Albert@txdot.gov Center for Contract Utilization 713-802-5795 Gail.Morea@txdot.gov Support Services Center 210-615-5901 Kathy.DeLuna@txdot.gov PS-CAMS To request access to PS-CAMS visit: https://tntoday.dot.state.tx.us/PEPS/Pages/ps-cams.aspx Contact – Mindi Menzel, 512-416-2712, Mindi.Menzel@txdot.gov CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Introduction Table of Contents Housekeeping ............................................................................................................................................. 2 Participant Guides .................................................................................................................................. 2 Class Timing.............................................................................................................................................. 2 WebEx Participation ............................................................................................................................... 2 Evaluations ............................................................................................................................................... 2 Course Info................................................................................................................................................... 3 Negotiated Contracts ........................................................................................................................... 3 Mandatory Training Classes ................................................................................................................... 3 Optional Training ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Target Audience ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Course Structure ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Course Objectives .................................................................................................................................. 4 PEPS and its Steering Committee .......................................................................................................... 5 Important PEPS Contacts ....................................................................................................................... 5 Three Key Parts of the Process ............................................................................................................... 6 How do you make the most out of this training? ................................................................................ 7 Page 1 | Introduction CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Housekeeping Participant Guides • A copy was attached to the appointment. • Blank space is provided throughout for taking notes and completing activities. • Slides are not provided, but all slide content is captured within the Participant Guide. Class Timing • Class is from 8:00-3:00 both days. • We will take frequent breaks (approximately every hour) and will have an hour for lunch. WebEx Participation WebEx has a variety of tools to maintain an interactive experience. All interaction is voluntary, however, increased engagement will result in increased retention and understanding of the material. Evaluations We will use Survey Monkey to capture class feedback. Time will be provided at the end of each module to enter feedback while it is still fresh. A key mission within PEPS is continuous improvement. Honest feedback is critical to knowing when and how to improve. Please use the time provided, and any additional time necessary after class, to provide feedback. Page 2 | Introduction CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Course Info Negotiated Contracts Mandatory Training Classes CTR600 – Introduction to PEPS Contracting • Online – 2 hours • Required for signature authorities and certain PEPS employees CTR620 – Provider Selection • 12 hours • Required for employees involved in the consultant selection process CTR621 – PEPS Contract Negotiations • 12 hours • Required for employees involved in PEPS contract negotiations CTR622 – Contract/Work Authorization Management • 18 hours • Required for project managers and others who support the contract/work authorization management process Page 3 | Introduction CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Optional Training CTR616 – Errors & Omissions • 16 hours • Recommended for project managers CTR623 – Construction Engineering Inspection Contract Management • 12 hours • Recommended for employees who manage CEI contracts or work authorizations All PEPS classes are open to anyone interested, regardless of the recommended or required audience. Target Audience This 12-hour class is designed for district and division staff who are involved with selecting consultants for PEPS contracts. Course Structure • Module 1 – Laws & Background • Module 2 – Contracting Overview • Module 3 – Consultant Selection Teams • Module 4 – Solicitations • Module 5 – Provider Response & Evaluation • Module 6 – Finalizing Selections Course Objectives • Understand the PEPS selection process. • Understand roles and responsibilities. • Emphasize importance of good judgement with contracting. Page 4 | Introduction CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection PEPS and its Steering Committee Important PEPS Contacts Page 5 | Introduction CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Three Key Parts of the Process Page 6 | Introduction CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection How do you make the most out of this training? • Utilize course materials and resources throughout the entire course (use the Add Text Fill & Sign Tool to take notes and answer questions in your Participant Guide). • Actively participate! o Ask questions. o Engage in class discussion. o Complete exercises. o Take notes. o Complete review questions. • Follow the Ground Rules. o Be respectful to the other participants and the instructors. o Login to class on time and return from breaks on time. • Note the following. o White space has been added for note taking. o Your Participant Guide contains as much, if not more, detail than the slides. o The text and graphics between the slides and Participant Guide may differ in appearance. o Slides are used to guide discussion and are not provided to participants. o Follow along with the slides using the headings in your Participant Guide. Page 7 | Introduction CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Module 1 Laws and Background Table of Contents A. Federal and State Laws, Rules, and Regulations ................................................................................ 3 Structure ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Example – Brooks Act ............................................................................................................................. 4 Conflicts of Interest ................................................................................................................................. 6 Employee Conflicts of Interest ....................................................................................................... 6 Consultant Conflicts of Interest ................................................................................................... 10 B. Contract Types ...................................................................................................................................... 13 PEPS Contract Types ............................................................................................................................. 13 Indefinite Deliverable ........................................................................................................................... 13 • Ideal for procuring disciplines of work ............................................................................................ 13 Specific Deliverable Contract ............................................................................................................. 15 Multi-phase Specific Deliverable ........................................................................................................ 16 What’s the difference? ........................................................................................................................ 17 C. Procurement Planning ......................................................................................................................... 18 Planning Timeline .................................................................................................................................. 19 Annual Procurement Plan Development ................................................................................... 19 Needs Identification by District/Division ............................................................................................. 20 PEPS Procurement Planning Considerations...................................................................................... 21 Navigating to the Projected Contracts List ....................................................................................... 21 FY2022 Projected Contracts List (Left Columns) ........................................................................ 24 FY2022 Projected Contracts List (Right Columns)...................................................................... 25 FY22 and FY23 Procurement Plans .............................................................................................. 26 Page 1 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Learning Objectives After the completion of this module participants will be able to: • identify conflicts of interest • distinguish between indefinite, specific deliverable, and multiphase specific deliverable contract types • understand the procurement planning process Page 2 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection A. Federal and State Laws, Rules, and Regulations Refer to Chapter 2 of the PEPS Contracting: Selection Process Manual Structure Page 3 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Example – Brooks Act Page 4 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Appendix 1: Federal and State Laws and Regulations Please navigate to Appendix 1 in your Participant Guide PDF. The Brooks Act is the federal law that mandates advertising for and qualifications-based selection of professional engineering and architecture firms that mandates that cost shall not be a factor in the selection process. Page 5 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Conflicts of Interest Employee Conflicts of Interest Gifts Appendix 2: TxDOT Ethics Policy Please navigate to Appendix 2 in your Participant Guide PDF. Page 6 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Nepotism Disclosure Page 7 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Page 8 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Page 9 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Consultant Conflicts of Interest Form 1295 Revolving Door – Part 1 Page 10 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Revolving Door – Part 2 Revolving Door Definitions Page 11 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection If any of these (or similar) scenarios apply to you, it does not mean you are in trouble or have done anything wrong. However, it DOES mean that you need to discuss the potential conflict of interest with the PEPS Service Center immediately so it can help escalate the concern to the appropriate staff (General Counsel/Compliance). Their staff will determine whether there is a conflict of interest and what measures, if any, need to be taken to mitigate the conflict of interest. Page 12 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection B. Contract Types Refer to Chapter 2 of the PEPS Contracting: Selection Process Manual PEPS Contract Types Indefinite Deliverable • Ideal for procuring disciplines of work • Contract values are capped by Administration: o Single discipline contracts are capped at $2M o Multi-discipline contracts are capped at $5M o Higher values require approval from the PEPS Division Director • There is a 4-year limit for issuing new work authorizations • ID contracts have a 5-year contract term o Five years is the maximum for federal contracts o Non-federal contracts can have a longer term with approval of the PEPS Division Director Can be set up with a longer term at execution Can be extended later through a supplemental agreement • There is potential for several contracts being awarded per selection • ID contracts are easier to execute Page 13 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Are indefinite deliverable contracts the same as … On call contracts? Answer: _______ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Evergreen contracts? Answer: _______ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Page 14 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection • Contract Scope o Generally defining types of work expected o Addresses standards & requirements that apply to all work • Work Authorization Scopes o Defines project assignment, tasks, controls, & deliverables o Identifies additional requirements not addressed in the contract o Task outline should clearly correspond to negotiated budget Work Authorizations should be able to stand alone as an engineering project OR directly support another engineering Work Authorization under the same contract. Specific Deliverable Contract Page 15 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Multi-phase Specific Deliverable Page 16 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection • Contract Scope o Specifically defines project assignment, tasks, & deliverables o Addresses standards & requirements o Task outline should clearly correspond to negotiated budget • Work Authorization Scopes o Reflect contract scope, with modifications, as needed o Provides control of phased work What’s the difference? Page 17 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection C. Procurement Planning Refer to Chapter 3 of the PEPS Contracting: Selection Process Manual Fiscal year procurement plan Page 18 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Planning Timeline Annual Procurement Plan Development Spring/Summer Send needs request to D/D Develop draft plan Summer/Fall Refine plan Fall/Winter Steering Committee Post as “Projected contracts list” approval Page 19 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Needs Identification by District/Division • Factors in decision-making: o Four -year work plan o Anticipated project schedule o Budget o Procurement wave schedule o Level of in-house expertise/resources o Others • Ensure the need is matched to the correct procurement method: o Is the work engineering, architecture, or surveying work? Page 20 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection PEPS Procurement Planning Considerations 1. Number of project needs 2. Similarity of multiple projects (disciplines) 3. Project size, value, duration, and complexity 4. Funding source 5. Magnitude of work type needed 6. Department goals and objectives 7. Good contracting practices Navigating to the Projected Contracts List www.txdot.gov Page 21 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Page 22 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection FY2022 Projected Contracts List Page 23 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection FY2022 Projected Contracts List (Left Columns) Page 24 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection FY2022 Projected Contracts List (Right Columns) Page 25 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection FY22 and FY23 Procurement Plans Do you recall? Fill in the blanks. The PEPS _________________ _______________ is the person responsible for managing the selection process. The PEPS ___________ _____________ ____________ is identified as the primary point of contact for consultant questions about procurements during the selection process. Page 26 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Do you recall? Fill in the blanks. The maximum number of years for the life of a federal ID contract is ______. The Federal law that mandates qualifications-based selection is called the _______________ Act. New ID work authorizations can only be issued within _____ years after contract execution. Single-discipline ID contracts are capped at $ __________ Multi-discipline ID contract $ cap (w/o PEPS DD approval) are capped at $____________________. There are ______ procurement waves scheduled each year. Please complete your evaluation for this module. Page 27 | Module 1: Laws and Background CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Module 2 Contracting Overview Table of Contents A. Contracting Process Overview ............................................................................................................. 3 PEPS Selection Processes ....................................................................................................................... 4 Contract Funding.................................................................................................................................... 4 Selection Processes................................................................................................................................. 5 Federal Management ............................................................................................................................ 5 Comparison of Processes ....................................................................................................................... 6 Procurement Process Determination.................................................................................................... 6 Procurement Process Tasks – Working Days ........................................................................................ 7 B. Developing the Scope of Work ............................................................................................................. 8 Elements of a Scope............................................................................................................................. 10 Example: Scope Statement for PS&E ......................................................................................... 11 Example: General Requirements ............................................................................................... 11 Task Descriptions ........................................................................................................................... 12 Agreement and Attachment A: General Provisions ........................................................................ 15 Contract Development ....................................................................................................................... 16 Deliverable Resources .......................................................................................................................... 17 Standard ID Scope Templates ............................................................................................................ 19 ID Scope Template Best Practices .............................................................................................. 20 Why are we developing a detailed scope at this point? ........................................................ 21 ITD Coordination Prior to Selection ............................................................................................. 21 Page 1 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Learning Objectives After the completion of this module participants will be able to: • identify the PEPS selection process • recognize elements of a scope Page 2 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection A. Contracting Process Overview PEPS Procurement Process PEPS Selection Process PEPS Electronic Submittal Process Page 3 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Refer to Chapter 6 of the PEPS Contracting: Selection Process Manual PEPS Selection Processes • Routine Processes o Non-federal with HUB goal o Non-federal with DBE goal o Federal with DBE goal • Less Common Processes o Emergency o Urgent & Critical Contract Funding • Non-federally funded → “State contract” o 100% state funds o Combination of state & local funds • Federally funded contracts → “Federal contract” o Any percentage of federal funds o Example: A contract with 10% federal funds & 90% state funds is a federal contract • Funding source is a factor in determining which selection process to use Page 4 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Selection Processes Federal Management Page 5 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Comparison of Processes Procurement Process Determination Page 6 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Procurement Process Tasks – Working Days Page 7 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection B. Developing the Scope of Work Refer to Chapter 6 of the PEPS Contracting: Selection Process Manual The scope of work: • defines project and expectations • defines TxDOT’s needs and provides a basis for: o staffing needs o level of effort o other direct expenses • reflects project complexity Time invested in scope development saves time, money, effort, and frustration. Page 8 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection The scope of work identifies: • Project details • Project phasing • Design criteria & other standards • District SOPs and other preferences • Full range of tasks & detailed descriptions (Work Breakdown Structure) • Special analysis requirements • Software requirements • Assumptions • Major milestones • Deliverables Contract administration requirements Page 9 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection The main components of the scope can be found in contract Attachment C: Services to be Provided by the Engineer. Contract Attachments A: General Provisions B: Services to be provided by the State C: Services to be Provided by the Engineer D: Work Authorization & Supplemental Work Authorization E: Fee Schedule F: Work Schedule (SD only) G: Computer Graphics Files for Document and Information Exchange (where applicable) H: DBE/HUB Forms I: Information Resources and Security Requirements Elements of a Scope Page 10 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Example: Scope Statement for PS&E The Engineer shall provide engineering services required for the preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) and related documents, for various projects in both rural and urban settings. These services may include, but are not limited to: preparing roadway and bridge design, hydrologic and hydraulic design, traffic signal design, survey, and geotechnical data collection, and if requested, provide design support and testify as the Engineer of Record at Right of Way hearings, and construction phase services necessary to support the design process. Example: General Requirements Design Criteria. The Engineer shall prepare all work in accordance with the latest version of applicable State’s procedures, specifications, manuals, guidelines, standard drawings, and standard specifications or previously approved special provisions and special specifications, which include: the PS&E Preparation Manual, Roadway Design Manual, Hydraulic Design Manual, the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TMUTCD), Standard Specifications for Construction and Maintenance of Highways, Streets and Bridges (latest Edition), and other State approved manuals. When design criteria are not identified in State manuals, the Engineer shall notify the State and refer to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Street, (latest Edition). In addition, the Engineer shall follow the State’s District guidelines in developing the Plan, Specification, and Estimate (PS&E) package. The Engineer shall prepare each PS&E package in a form suitable for letting through the State’s construction contract bidding and awarding process. Page 11 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Task Descriptions Example: Task Descriptions (Work Breakdown) • 110-Route and Design Studies • 120-Social, Economic/Environmental Studies, & Public Involvement • 130-Right of Way Data • 145/164-Project Management and Administration • 150-Field Surveying and Photogrammetry • 160-Roadway Design Controls • 161-Drainage Report • 162-Signing, Pavement Markings and Signalization • 163-Miscellaneous (Roadway) • 165-Traffic Management Systems (Permanent) • 170-Bridge Design • 390-Construction Phase Services Page 12 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Example: Subtask Structure • 160-Roadway Design Controls o 160.1 Geometric Design o 160.2 Roadway Design o 160.3 Typical Sections o 160.4 Mainlane and Frontage Road Design o 160.5 Interchange o 160.6 Cross Streets o 160.7 Cut and Fill Quantities o 160.8 Plan Preparation o 160.9 Wetlands Information o 160.10 Pavement Design o 160.11 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Example: Subtask Description 160.11. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities. The Engineer shall coordinate with the State to incorporate pedestrian and bicycle facilities as required or shown on the project’s schematic. All pedestrian/bicycle facilities must be designed in accordance with the latest Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG), the Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS), and the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. Page 13 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Example: Deliverable 30% Plans Submittal • Eight sets of 11” x 17” plan sheets for the State District Review • Estimate of construction cost • Engineer’s internal QA & QC markup set • Form 1002 & Design Exceptions with existing and proposed typical sections, location map & design exception exhibits • If applicable, a preliminary 3D model, in DGN format, created using Bentley’s OpenRoads and/or 3D MicroStation\Civil tools, & with detail to verify the design of the 30% plan sheets. Page 14 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Agreement and Attachment A: General Provisions Agreement Attachment A: General Provisions It is important to know what information is contained in the Agreement and General Provisions of the standard contract, but it is also important NOT to repeat this information elsewhere in the contract. Page 15 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Contract Development SD Contract Development – General Guidance Page 16 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Deliverable Resources PS&E Stages – Expected Completion Guidelines This table is provided as a guide for defining what is expected by stage of completion for PS&E submittal. This table can be used to communicate expectations to the consultant so deliverable reviews are productive and the project schedule is maintained. This resource is an Excel file that can be found: Crossroads > PEPS > Contract Development and Negotiation > Scope of Work section > Resources of Identifying Deliverables section Page 17 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Examples of Deliverables for Advance Planning Type Projects This document lists examples of deliverables during the initial phase of work and afterward, quantity estimates of deliverables, example unique direct expenses, and public involvement activities associated with the project. Guidance on the Expectation and Delivery of Quality Deliverables This document outlines TxDOT’s responsibility to review deliverables, provide comments, and coordinate with the provider through final acceptance of a deliverable. Providing for Construction Phase Services This document details how to amend the scope and budget of the contract to allow for construction phase services. Page 18 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Standard ID Scope Templates • Architectural • Bridge On-Off System • Commercial Lab • CEI • Construction Scheduling • Geotechnical Engineering • Hydrology & Hydraulics • Materials Engineering (Asphalt/Concrete) • OVTI • PS&E • Schematic/Environmental • Survey • Traffic Engineering • Traffic Signal Timing • Utility Engineering Standard ID scope templates may be used as a starting point for SD scope development. Page 19 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection ID Scope Template Best Practices Divisions may add or delete tasks based on their modified discipline of work Page 20 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Why are we developing a detailed scope at this point? • All SD contract scopes and ID contract scopes that do not use the ID template (with minor changes for project information) must be reviewed and approved by Contract Services Division (CSD). • The Information Technology Division (ITD) Intake Form must be completed and submitted to ITD if the scope contains IT components • If the form indicates that an ITD review is required, the ITD review must be coordinated prior to CSD review • ITD and CSD reviews must be completed prior to advertisement ITD Coordination Prior to Selection Page 21 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Scope Templates Page 22 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Let’s Review! Fill in the blanks. List the three selection processes PEPS uses: 1. ______________________________ 2. ______________________________ 3. ______________________________ Developing a tight scope is a mitigation strategy that reduces __________ for both TxDOT and the consultant. Please complete the evaluation for Module 2. Page 23 | Module 2: Contracting Overview CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Module 3 Consultant Selection Team Table of Contents A. Consultant Selection Team (CST) ......................................................................................................... 3 What is a CST? ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Why use a team? .................................................................................................................................... 3 CST Requirements ................................................................................................................................... 3 CST Restrictions ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Responsibilities of CST Members ............................................................................................................ 4 Limits on Consultant Meetings ............................................................................................................... 4 Conflicts of Interest ................................................................................................................................. 5 What About the Consultant? ........................................................................................................ 5 Concerns about conflicts? .................................................................................................................... 6 Wave Kickoff............................................................................................................................................ 7 CST Member Replacement ................................................................................................................... 7 Preclusion ................................................................................................................................................. 8 B. Team Building .......................................................................................................................................... 9 The Tuckman Model for the Stages of Group Development ............................................................ 9 1. Forming ....................................................................................................................................... 10 2. Storming ..................................................................................................................................... 10 3. Norming ...................................................................................................................................... 10 4. Performing .................................................................................................................................. 11 Keys to a Successful CST ...................................................................................................................... 12 Page 1 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Learning Objectives After the completion of this module participants will be able to: • identify what a consultant selection team is • recall the key components of the Tuckman Model for the stages of group development Page 2 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection A. Consultant Selection Team (CST) What is a CST? A Consultant Selection Team is a team of individuals who evaluate proposals and interviews, and who select a provider based on demonstrated qualifications. Why use a team? • Pools knowledge from different resource areas • Protects employees from allegations of bias by dividing responsibility among multiple employees CST Requirements CST members should have an understanding of the PEPS contracting process and expertise in the type of work being procured. Each CST is required to be made up of the following: • A minimum of three TxDOT employees o Typically, the TxDOT Project Manager (SD Contracts) and subject matter experts o Procurement Engineer optional • A minimum of one (two recommended) o PE for engineering contracts o RA for architectural contracts o PE or RPLS for surveying contracts CST Restrictions To avoid conflicts, pressures, or other obvious imbalances, the following CST restrictions apply. • No non-TxDOT personnel • No supervisor/employee combinations • No spouse or sibling pairs Page 3 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Responsibilities of CST Members • Primary responsibilities o Developing scope of work for SD contracts—TxDOT PM o Developing proposal content & interview criteria o Identifying major work categories o Developing scoring grids o Evaluating proposals & interviews o Deliberating rankings & scores • Other responsibilities o NLCs development — Subject matter expert (SME) o Reviewing NLC submittals against minimum requirements o Assisting with provider debriefs Limits on Consultant Meetings To provide a fair and equitable process for all providers competing on solicitations: • CST members cannot discuss upcoming contracts with individual consultants during the procurement process • Refer questions to PEPS Service Center Manager • Offer pre-RFP meeting to all consultants Page 4 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Conflicts of Interest Reminder - Employees are responsible for avoiding conflicts of interest and even the appearance of conflicting activities. Identify these issues (or potential issues) as early as possible. Never wait to see if a firm submits a response or is selected for a contract. Conflicts need to be addressed as early in the procurement process as possible. What About the Consultant? Consultants also attest that no conflicts of interest exist. Page 5 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Concerns about conflicts? Ask Disclose the issue Talk to o Supervisor o District Engineer / Division Director o PEPS o General Counsel Division o Compliance Division Page 6 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Wave Kickoff PEPS conducts just in time training • Conducted four times per year (Waves) • Attended by all CSTs participating in the Wave • Refresh of PEPS procurement process Following training, the CSTs initiate the procurement process • The CST will typically start by reviewing the procurement calendar and all associated tasks and deadline • The CST will also begin working on development of contract goals and consultant characteristics. This will help the team get in sync regarding the priorities of the procurement. CST Member Replacement Page 7 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Preclusion Preclusion – General Guidance on Potential Conflicts Page 8 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection B. Team Building The Tuckman Model for the Stages of Group Development CSTs are not always made up of members who already know one another. Even if team members already know one another, the process of performing as a CST is different than each member’s normal duties. This might result in a shift in roles as each member brings different strengths and experiences to the process. It is important to know that teams often go through recognizable stages as they become a united group with common goals. Bruce Tuckman's Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing model describes these stages. Understanding this process can help team members become effective more quickly. Page 9 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection 1. Forming • Most team members are positive and polite. • Some team members are anxious. • Other team members are simply excited about the task ahead. • Roles and responsibilities aren’t clear. • This stage can last for a while as people start to work together, and as they try to get to know their new colleagues. 2. Storming • People start to push against the boundaries established in the forming stage. o Storming often begins when there is a conflict between team members’ natural working styles. o Some may question the worth of the team’s goal, and they may resist taking on tasks. This is the stage where many teams fail. 3. Norming • People start to resolve their differences, appreciate colleagues’ strengths, and respect leader authority. • The team may socialize together, and they are able to ask one another for help and provide constructive feedback. • People develop a stronger commitment to the team goal, and start to see good progress towards the goal. There is often a prolonged overlap between storming and norming, because, as new tasks come up, the team may lapse back into behavior from the storming stage. Page 10 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection 4. Performing Hard work leads to the achievement of the team’s goal without friction. Page 11 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Keys to a Successful CST 1. Know the goal • Qualifications-based selection should always be at the forefront when establishing your goals. 2. Be clear on your role and responsibilities • Each CST member is on the team for a reason – understand your role, trust one another, and work together toward the goal. 3. Participate • Participation from all members of the team is required throughout the entire process to achieve the goal. 4. Communicate • This is key to a successful team. o The PEPS Procurement Engineer is responsible for communicating steps, rules, deadlines, and processes. o CST members are also responsible for communicating throughout the process regarding schedules, conflicts, and anything requiring clarification. Ask questions if you have them. Team Building Exercise Page 12 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Let’s Review! Select the correct response. Which of the following is true about Consultant Selection Teams? a. The CST selects a provider based on demonstrated qualifications b. A CST is used to help protect employees from allegations of bias by dividing responsibility among multiple employees c. The CST evaluates proposals d. All of the above What is the minimum number of TxDOT employees that should serve on a CST? a. Two b. Three c. Four d. Five What is the minimum number of licensed professionals required on a CST? a. b. c. d. One Two Three Four CST members cannot discuss upcoming contracts with individual consultants during the selection process. Who is the primary point of contact to address questions during the selection process? a. District Engineer/Division Director b. PEPS Division Director c. Contract Services Division d. PEPS Service Center Manager Page 13 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection To validate that a conflict of interest does not exist, CST members are required to sign what upon selection of a provider(s)? a. Nepotism Disclosure Form b. TxDOT Ethics Policy c. The contract d. Form 1295 Please complete the evaluation for Module 3. Page 14 | Module 3: Consultant Selection Team CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Module 4 Solicitations Table of Contents A. Request for Proposal (RFP) Elements ................................................................................................... 3 What is the RFP? ...................................................................................................................................... 3 What should the RFP address? .............................................................................................................. 4 The Purpose of RFP Proposal Content/Criteria .................................................................................... 4 B. Steps to Develop the RFP ...................................................................................................................... 5 Step 1 ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 Step 2 ........................................................................................................................................................ 7 Weighting Evaluation Criteria in the RFP Example ...................................................................... 8 Why Use Different Weights? ........................................................................................................... 8 Step 3 ........................................................................................................................................................ 9 Proposal Content in the RFP ........................................................................................................ 10 Developing the Proposal Content .............................................................................................. 10 Proposal Content for ID Contract Example ............................................................................... 11 Proposal Content for SD Contract Example .............................................................................. 11 Things to Avoid when Developing Proposal Content............................................................... 12 Best Practices................................................................................................................................. 14 Step 4 ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 Purpose of the Scoring Grid ......................................................................................................... 15 Tips for Developing the Scoring Grid .......................................................................................... 16 Sample Scoring Grid Template ................................................................................................... 17 Proposal Evaluation Criteria and Scoring Template Example ................................................. 18 Step 5 ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Page 1 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Learning Objectives After the completion of this module participants will be able to: • understand the contents of an RFP • develop goals & characteristics for an RFP • develop proposal content for an RFP • develop a scoring grid • refine a scoring grid • identify the steps in the RFP process Page 2 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection A. Request for Proposal (RFP) Elements Refer to Chapter 7 of the PEPS Contracting: Selection Process Manual What is the RFP? • Details related to the submission of the proposal package that are provided to the consultants o Proposal content and standard evaluation criteria (with weightings) are included o Open format of the proposal allows maximum flexibility for the provider response Page 3 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection What should the RFP address? • What is the project or discipline of work? • What work will be expected of the provider? • How should the provider respond to the advertisement? • What type of information should be in the proposal? • How will the proposal be evaluated? • What should the proposal look like? The Purpose of RFP Proposal Content/Criteria Page 4 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection B. Steps to Develop the RFP Step 1 Develop contract goals and characteristics What is the purpose of defining goals and characteristics? • Define the needs of the _______________ early • Ensure that nothing is missed in the __________ • Define the ____________________ of a provider who can meet the contract needs • Align the __________ with what is most important RFQ questions and the RFP Proposal Content will be built from the goals and characteristics defined in this step Page 5 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection How does the CST develop goal and characteristics? The CST should consider the following questions. • What type of __________ will the contract provide? • What are TxDOT’s specific ____________________ in this contract? • What are the essential _____________________ of a provider that can best meet TxDOT’s contract needs? How does the CST accomplish this step? • Ensure the entire CST is _______________ • Consider what the _____ __________ of the contract will need • Keep the __________ _____ _________________________ simple & straight-forward • Complete this step __________ going on to the next steps Example Step 1: Develop Goals & Characteristics Page 6 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Step 2 Review standard evaluation criteria & set weightings Four standard evaluation criteria. o Each criterion should be weighted according to the importance of that criteria to the contract. o The scoring grid is built around these criteria. 1. Technical approach • project understanding, innovative concepts or alternatives 2. Project manager’s relevant experience • similar to related projects, project management experience 3. Project management planning • project staffing and resource management (who, how, and why), communication plan, quality control procedures o may include project scheduling and phasing for SD contract 4. Key staff’s relevant experience • experience with similar projects Setting Weights • Set weights for each of the evaluation criteria • Weights must be between 10 and 35 points • Each criterion must have a different weight Page 7 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Weighting Evaluation Criteria in the RFP Example Proposal Evaluation Criteria The CST members will independently score the proposals based on the criteria and relative importance factors (weighting) provided below. The proposal scores will be used to determine the short list. The ESA score is pulled from PS- CAMS for the Past Performance Score criterion. Why Use Different Weights? • If scores are tied, we look at the criterion with the greatest weight. • Continue through all criteria until tie is broken. • If tie still isn’t broken, the PEPS Director will break the tie via random method (e.g., drawing a name or a coin flip) Step 2: Develop Weights for Evaluation Criteria Page 8 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Step 3 Developing the proposal content paragraph • The proposal will cover the required content in written format. • The interview will cover the required content in a face-to-face presentation. • The CST should develop broad subjects for the proposal with the same or narrower subject for the interview. The CST may want to use the same subjects for both the Proposal and the Interview for ID or less complex SD contracting projects. Page 9 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Proposal Content in the RFP Developing the Proposal Content The Procurement Engineer must work with the CST members to develop one or two paragraphs describing the project, providing a scenario, or describing other types of information that the CST wants to see in the narrative of the proposal. The narrative will be evaluated as a whole using the four evaluation criteria: technical approach, project manager’s relevant experience, project management planning, and key staff’s relevant experience. • What are the essential skills or experience of the PM and key personnel? • What project experience or technical approach will set the firms apart? Page 10 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Proposal Content for ID Contract Example Proposal Content for SD Contract Example Page 11 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Key Points about Proposal Content • The purpose of the descriptive paragraph is to focus the provider to specific subject of discussion. • The descriptive paragraph is developed with the evaluation criteria in mind. • The narrative (Proposal) will be evaluated using all four evaluation criteria. • PEPS provides a Guidance for Developing Proposal Content Section of the RFP document, which includes examples for the descriptive paragraph. Guidance for Developing Proposal Content Section of the RFP Things to Avoid when Developing Proposal Content Overly specific experience This could be an issue because It could result in unintentionally eliminating qualified firms, and it could be perceived as bias – intentionally making experience so specific to narrow competition. Vague content Why might this be an issue? __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Page 12 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Requiring TxDOT-specific experience This must be avoided because It is illegal. Procurements must be open to all firms qualified and licensed to do business in Texas. Also, experience with other states, cities, or counties is just as valid, even if it is not your preference. Setting restrictive time frames on experience Why might this be an issue? __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Asking for firm location This must be avoided because It does not have anything to do with whether a firm is qualified to do the work. Additionally, concerns about a firm’s location can be tied to costs and costs cannot be considered in selection. Abbreviations, acronyms, and non-standard terms Why might this be an issue? __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Page 13 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Best Practices Step 3: Develop Proposal Content Paragraph Step 4 Developing the scoring grid for criteria • The CST will develop a scoring grid. The grid is built around the four standard evaluation criteria: o Technical Approach o PM Experience o Key Staff Experience o Project Management Planning Page 14 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Purpose of the Scoring Grid • • • • • Define the basis of scoring the responses Ensure CST members are all using the same criteria Determine responses expected for the proposal Define what falls short, meets, or exceeds requirements Differentiate between providers Key Points about Developing the Scoring Grid • The scoring grid is built around the criteria. • The proposal is evaluated for each of the four criteria as detailed in the RFP. • The phrase “answers may include, but are not limited to” should be used on the high score of 5 to allow inclusion of “wow” responses. Page 15 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Tips for Developing the Scoring Grid • Reward quality, not quantity. If you ask for one example, but they provide two, they do not automatically receive a higher score. Evaluate the quality of the example. More does not automatically mean better. • Think about how to score examples. You want to reward good quality examples. Identify what makes a good example (similar complexity, significant challenges, etc.) • Be mindful of the space provided for the response when developing your grid. The grid should be representative of the length of the answer you expect • Award rewarding gold plating and TxDOT experience. Just because they have a former TxDOT Area Engineer/District Engineer, etc. does not automatically make them more qualified. The goal is to differentiate between providers based on an objective evaluation of their responses. Page 16 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Sample Scoring Grid Template Page 17 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Proposal Evaluation Criteria and Scoring Template Example What would you score these criteria? __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Page 18 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Step 4: Develop Scoring Grid Step 5 Set the length of the proposal • The CST must set the maximum number of pages for the proposal. The length should allow the provider enough room to thoroughly present the subjects and examples. Several pages for each subject are recommended. More pages may be necessary if drawings or graphics are required to address the subjects. • Recommended proposal length is 8-15 pages. • The format is left open to interpretation by the provider. The open format allows the provider to enhance the visual effectiveness of the proposal and not have to follow a template. The proposal must be legible when printed on 8.5” x 11” paper. Page 19 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Time to Review! Match the steps of the RFP development process. Step 1 Review standard evaluation criteria and set weightings based on contract Step 2 Establish contract goals and consultant characteristics Step 3 Set response length Step 4 Develop paragraph describing proposal content based on contract goals, consultant characteristics, and evaluation criteria Step 5 Develop the scoring grid Page 20 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Choose the correct answer. Which of the following statements are true for RFP criteria weights? a. They should all be the same b. They should all be different c. The weight should be between 10 and 35 points d. Both b and c RFP Example Please navigate to Appendix 3 in your Participant Guide PDF. Please complete your evaluation for Module 4. Page 21 | Module 4: Solicitations CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Module 5 Provider Response and Evaluation Table of Contents A. Provider Response .................................................................................................................................. 3 What is the provider response? ............................................................................................................. 3 Response components................................................................................................................... 4 Proposal Screening ................................................................................................................................. 4 Who can screen? ............................................................................................................................ 5 Fairness and Consistency ....................................................................................................................... 5 Screening process ........................................................................................................................... 6 The Long List ............................................................................................................................................. 7 Evaluation and Deliberation.................................................................................................................. 7 What does a procurement look like in Bonfire? .................................................................................. 8 Scorecard in Bonfire ............................................................................................................................... 9 Reviewer scores section ......................................................................................................................... 9 Evaluation Parameters ................................................................................................................. 10 Deliberation Meetings .......................................................................................................................... 11 Why deliberate? ............................................................................................................................ 11 Rescoring After Deliberation ............................................................................................................... 12 Frequently Asked Questions ................................................................................................................ 13 Establishing the Short List ...................................................................................................................... 14 What is the short list? ..................................................................................................................... 14 When do we short list (interview)? .............................................................................................. 14 B. Short List Evaluations (Interviews) ....................................................................................................... 15 Interview Process Responsibilities ........................................................................................................ 15 Interview and Contract Guide (ICG) ................................................................................................. 16 ICG Contents ................................................................................................................................. 16 Interview Process ................................................................................................................................... 17 In-person Interviews .............................................................................................................................. 17 Tips for Developing Interview Content ............................................................................................... 18 Example Interview Evaluation Criteria ........................................................................................ 19 Set Key Roles for the Interview ............................................................................................................ 20 Interview Format Options ..................................................................................................................... 20 Typical Interview Outline – Option 1 ........................................................................................... 21 Follow-up Questions .............................................................................................................................. 22 Tips for Follow-up Questions ......................................................................................................... 22 Page 1 | Module 5: Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Typical Interview Outline – Option 2 ........................................................................................... 24 Scoring the Interview ............................................................................................................................ 25 Learning Objectives After the completion of this module participants will be able to: • Understand what the provider response is • Understand the steps in the provider evaluation process Page 2 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection A. Provider Response Refer to Chapter 8 of the PEPS Contracting: Selection Process Manual What is the provider response? The provider response is a formal document submitted by the provider in response to an RFP that states the provider’s qualifications to perform the advertised contract. Page 3 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Response components The Proposal is the provider response. Proposal components (“attachments”) include: • Proposal cover page • Proposal • Project team composition form • NLC qualification template • Subprovider contact information • HUB Subcontracting Plan (HSP) Proposal Screening • The Proposal screening is not part of the actual evaluation. • The screening verifies the Proposal meets certain requirements including: o it has been received by the deadline o it is complete and includes all applicable attachments o the project team composition (PTC) form requirements are met o the Non-Listed Category (NLC) requirements are met A screening checklist must be used for Proposal screening. Proposal Screening Checklists Screening criteria are set in Bonfire for the procurement. A screening checklist is available to the provider and to the PEPS screener. Page 4 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Who can screen? • NLC items must be screened by subject matter experts. • Other items can be screened by anyone knowledgeable of the contracting process and familiar with the subject solicitation. • Screening guidance is available on the PEPS website. Fairness and Consistency If one response fails to meet a criterion and is considered nonresponsive, then all responses that fail to meet that same criterion are considered non-responsive. If a handling option is an issue, all responses with the same issue are to be handled the same way. Screening decisions are verified by: PEPS (Procurement Engineer, Service Center Manager, and Division Director) When in doubt, contact the PEPS Center of Excellence at PEPS_COE_Process@TxDOT.gov Page 5 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Screening process Page 6 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection The Long List • Proposals that pass screening are deemed “responsive.” • Proposals that fail screening are deemed “non-responsive” and disqualified from further consideration. • Responsive Proposals are “long-listed” and proceed to the evaluation stage. Evaluation and Deliberation 1. PEPS Procurement Engineer prepares the Bonfire eSET portal 2. Each CST member individually reviews the responses in Bonfire, evaluates them using a scoring grid, and enters scores in Bonfire 3. CST deliberates the providers’ scores using a tool in Bonfire 4. The Procurement Engineer will close the evaluation group 5. CST confirms rankings based on the Proposal and SOQ scores Page 7 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection What does a procurement look like in Bonfire? Page 8 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Scorecard in Bonfire Reviewer scores section Page 9 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Evaluation Parameters • Evaluate only what’s presented in the response. • Cost cannot be considered when evaluating providers. • Scores cannot be based on extraneous information or marketing material given by the provider. • Scores cannot reflect previous experiences with firms. o Past performance is reflected in the evaluation score average (ESA). o ESAs are compiled from Prime Provider Evaluations. Page 10 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Deliberation Meetings Deliberation meetings are meetings where the CST discusses firm scores to establish the short list for the solicitation. During the deliberation meeting(s), the CST should focus on: • Outliers/borderline scores • Notes and consultant responses • Findings – discuss openly and honestly During the deliberation meeting(s), the CST should avoid: • Discussing every firm and question • Unduly influencing other CST members • Updating scores for someone else • Scoring by consensus Why deliberate? • Not every CST member has the same knowledge base. • Sometimes a CST member misses things. • It removes the ‘blind’ nature of the outcome. • It helps with some of the ‘odd’ results. Page 11 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Rescoring After Deliberation CST members must update their own scores! Records can be subject to Open Records Requests during deliberation. Page 12 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Frequently Asked Questions What if we know a firm has submitted false information in their response? __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Page 13 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Establishing the Short List What is the short list? The short list is the top-ranked providers from the long list (i.e., firms who scored the highest on the Proposal or SOQ evaluation) that will be interviewed by the CST before the selection is made. Number of providers advancing to the short list: • Single selection: minimum of three • Multiple selection: minimum of three plus the number of contracts • Look for a clean break in the scores When do we short list (interview)? 1. 2. 3. 4. If it is an SD contract valued at $5 million or more If is it a large, complex ID contract If it is a federal management contract If the CST determines it would be helpful and necessary in distinguishing between firms Page 14 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection B. Short List Evaluations (Interviews) Refer to Chapter 9 of the PEPS Contracting: Selection Process Manual Interview Process Responsibilities Page 15 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Interview and Contract Guide (ICG) • Procurement Engineer notifies short-listed firms they will be interviewed and will receive an ICG • ICG is sent to short-listed consultants in advance • Each consultant is given equal interview prep time If interviews are spaced out over several weeks, the ICG should be sent in batches so that each firm has the same amount of time to prepare. Example Interview and Contract Guide Template Interviews are currently being conducted virtually ICG Contents The CST works with the Procurement Engineer to develop the ICG. The ICG is distributed at least two weeks prior to the beginning of the scheduled week(s) of interviews. The contents of the ICG include: 1. Evaluation criteria and content 2. Format and requirements of the interview 3. Interview schedule and attendance requirements Page 16 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Interview Process • Interviews can be conducted in-person or virtually, but a consistent method must be used for all interviews. • Virtual interviews will be hosted by the prime provider, not by TxDOT. This ensures the provider is responsible for all technology and connectivity issues. • Attendance is established in the RFP. Teams should refer to the RFP for clarification on who can attend (prime PM, task leaders, etc.). • Media may be used in the presentation such as PowerPoint, charts, or graphs. • No handouts are allowed. In-person Interviews • If interviews are set up to be held as in-person interviews, they will be held in-person, even is someone is no longer able to attend due to COVID or other reasons. This ensures a fair and equitable proces was used for all interviews. • Rooms must be set up to accommodate socia distancing by all attendees. • Teams must follow the equipment requirements outlined in the ICG. Only one computer is allowed per team. • No handouts are allowed to be left behind. We only evaluate teams based on what they present during the interview, not on any marketing or other materials that teams might bring. Interviews CANNOT be recorded! Page 17 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Tips for Developing Interview Content • Build on what was asked in the RFP. o Go deeper or more specific in certain areas. • Focus on specific subjects. o Focus on subjects that will be differentiators. • Apply the same rigor as in the RFP. o Make sure the description of the subjects to be discussed are clear and specific. Page 18 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Example Interview Evaluation Criteria Consultant Presentation Content Page 19 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Set Key Roles for the Interview • Lead questioner - CST member who asks majority of questions during the Q&A session of interviewed firm • Facilitator – PEPS PE facilitates the break & debrief of interviews • Timekeeper – CST member who watches the clock during interview and consultant presentation Interview Format Options There are two interview format options for this process. The CST selects the format based on the contract type. The Provider receives the interview presentation content, format, and schedule in the ICG a few weeks before the interview. • Option 1 – Provider Presentation and Q&A o One of the two alternatives to use for ID contracts o The provider will conduct a formal presentation, and TxDOT will ask follow-up questions in a Q&A session Option 1: Provider Presentation and Q&A must be used for SD contracts During the consultant presentation, each CST member should be taking notes and identifying follow-up questions they want to ask the consultant. Page 20 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection • Option 2 – Provider Question and Answer Session o One of the two alternatives to use for ID contracts o The interview will include a provider Q&A session, but there is no formal provider presentation Typical Interview Outline – Option 1 Page 21 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Follow-up Questions During the consultant presentation • Take notes & identify areas that need further understanding CST break (10-15 minutes) • Discuss & prioritize follow-up questions • One CST member consolidates questions o 2-3 questions max o Ask the most pressing questions first Tips for Follow-up Questions Page 22 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Are these acceptable questions? Can you talk more about how you handled the issue you brought up in your project example? Answer: _______ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Could you provide a better example of a project that addresses our criteria? Answer: ________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Can you provide us with more information on how you approached the public involvement difficulties you mentioned? Answer: _______ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ You mentioned in Question 3 that you would do steps A, B, and C. What steps did you miss? Answer: ________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Page 23 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Typical Interview Outline – Option 2 The CST may allow the consultant about 10 minutes of additional time to read the questions before the Q&A Session starts. Page 24 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Scoring the Interview • Develop a scoring grid for each interview criteria. • This is not a keyword search or test! • Evaluate the quality of the answer, not whether they got every last thing. • The evaluation criteria and weightings are shared with the consultants in the ICG. Page 25 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection What do you recall? Fill in the blanks. 1. Proposals that pass screening are called this _____ _____ 2. CSTs should always use this when evaluating provider responses ________ ________ 3. The list of qualified firms who scored the highest on the proposal are called this _________ __________ 4. If 3 contracts are being awarded through the same procurement, what is the minimum number of firms that would be interviewed? ________ Please complete your evaluation for Module 5. Page 26 | : Provider Response and Evaluation CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Module 6 Finalizing Selections Table of Contents A. Provider Notification .............................................................................................................................. 3 Provider Notification for Selected Firms ............................................................................................... 3 Provider Notification for Non-selected Firms ....................................................................................... 4 Appeals .................................................................................................................................................... 4 B. Nepotism Disclosure Form ..................................................................................................................... 5 C. Risk Analysis ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Risk Analysis Milestones ........................................................................................................................... 8 How should TxDOT apply the State law and associated TxDOT Risk Analysis Policy to PEPS contracts? ............................................................................................................................................ 8 Contract Risk Matrix ................................................................................................................................ 9 PEPS Risk Factors .................................................................................................................................... 11 D. Selection Results Publication .............................................................................................................. 12 E. Debriefs .................................................................................................................................................. 15 Individual Debriefs ................................................................................................................................ 15 Group Debriefs ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Debriefs for Selected Providers ........................................................................................................... 15 F. Next Steps .............................................................................................................................................. 16 Page 1 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Learning Objective After the completion of this module participants will be able to: • understand the final steps in the process of PEPS consultant selection Page 2 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection A. Provider Notification Provider Notification for Selected Firms The Procurement Engineer sends an email to selected providers. The email: • Requests confirmation by the provider of their intent to respond to the offer • Notifies the provider of Exhibit H-1, Form 1295, and insurance requirements • Provides a copy of the standard contract template • Provides instructions for proceeding with negotiations • Sends TxDOT Security Questionnaire Exhibit H-1 must be completed on all contracts and provides HUB and DBE information for prime and subproviders. Page 3 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Provider Notification for Non-selected Firms The Procurement Engineer sends an email to the providers who were not selected for a contract. The email: • Notifies the provider that they were not selected • Provides an email address or telephone number for questions Appeals • Providers not selected may file a written appeal with the Executive Director. • Providers have 6 days from the date of notification to file an appeal. • The appeal process is outlined in 43 TAC §9.7. Page 4 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection B. Nepotism Disclosure Form CST members complete a Nepotism Disclosure Form for the selected providers. Completion of the form may be required of non-CST members, but the form must be completed by any employee who makes decisions or recommendations regarding: • RFP development • Proposal goals or content • Interview criteria • Scoring grids • Evaluations • Provider selection Page 5 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Nepotism Disclosure Form Page 6 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection C. Risk Analysis • Performing a risk analysis is required by state law. • It is an integral part of good contracting and good project management. • Conducting an analysis helps determine the contracts that will require enhanced monitoring and oversight. Risk value is determined based on the probability and impact of an occurrence. Moderate and high risk factors MUST be managed during the contract and work authorization Page 7 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Risk Analysis Milestones How should TxDOT apply the State law and associated TxDOT Risk Analysis Policy to PEPS contracts? The procuring District or Division (D/D) must complete a risk analysis and complete the Contract Services Division Contract Risk Analysis Form at the beginning of the procurement process. • For contracts that will be managed by a District or Division (SD and ID contracts, the D/D Project Manager will be responsible for completing the form and providing a copy to the Procurement Engineer for the procurement file. • For contracts that will be managed by PEPS (primarily statewide ID contracts), the Procurement Engineer will be responsible for completing the form and keeping the procurement file. Page 8 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Risk Analysis Forms Links to the Risk Analysis Workbook can be found on the Contract Services Division or the PEPS Division web pages. The workbook contains the following four tabs: 1. 2. 3. 4. Instruction sheet Contract Risk Analysis Form Work Authorization Risk Analysis Form Revision Log Contract Risk Matrix Standard Contract Risk Factors LOW (1-3) MED (4-6) HIGH (7-9) 1 Type of Procurement One-time purchase of goods Services or ongoing purchase of goods Emergency, Sole Source, Proprietary 2 Cumulative Total Dollar Amount Less than $1 million $1 million to $10 million >$10 million Debarment Status Federal Government Not currently or ever debarred Debarred within the last three years, but not currently debarred Currently Debarred Past Performance All positive provider evaluations with TxDOT or other agencies Mostly positive provider evaluations with TxDOT or other agencies # 3 4 FACTOR SCORE NOTES Mostly negative provider evaluations with TxDOT or other agencies Page 9 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection 5 Audit Outcomes At least one audit performed with no issues or finding in audit(s) 6 Time Added to Contract (excluding renewals provided for in original contract) <3 months added to contract 3-6 months added to contract >6 months added to contract 7 Cumulative increase in contract value from original value (excluding renewals as per the original contract) Less than 10% 10% -- 50% >50% Contracts terminated for cause in the past 5 years No TxDOT or other contracts terminated for cause in the past 5 years Only one TxDOT or other contract terminated for cause in the past five years Multiple TxDOT or other contracts terminated for cause in the past five years 8 No audits performed OR audit(s) performed with moderate issues or findings Substantial issues or findings in audit(s) Page 10 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection PEPS Risk Factors The PEPS Risk Factors must be included on the Contract Risk Analysis form for every PEPS contract. Page 11 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection D. Selection Results Publication Consultants Selected for Negotiations Page 12 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection Page 13 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection The number of contracts being procured and the number of firms who submitted responsive proposals is displayed. The firms that received a contract are displayed, followed by the firms that received an interview (short-listed firms), and those who submitted responsive proposals. Page 14 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection E. Debriefs The purpose of a debrief is to give the provider helpful information on how to improve for future procurements. There are three types of debriefs: individual, group, or by Division Director. Individual Debriefs Individual debriefs may occur: • Once a firm has been notified of a non-responsive submittal • At notification that the firm is not selected for the short list • After the Selection Table is posted • Up to 4 months after contract execution Individual debriefs are conducted in person or by phone by the PEPS Procurement Engineer or Service Center Manager. Group Debriefs • These are given to the entire set of responsive firms at the same time. • These can occur any time after selection and for up to four months after contract execution. • Group debriefs are in person by the Service Center Manager. Debriefs for Selected Providers • These follow the same time frames as individual debriefs. • They are provided by the PEPS Division Director. • These debriefs are an opportunity for the provider to verify what they are doing well. Page 15 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections CTR620 PEPS Consultant Selection F. Next Steps 1. Document the selection process. • PEPS is the office of record for the procurement file. The Service Center creates and maintains the procurement file. o PEPS will collect all selection materials from CST members. • The Contract Services Division is the office of record for the executed contract documents. 2. PEPS will begin the negotiation process. • PEPS Contracting: Negotiation Process Manual • CTR621PEPS Contract Negotiations PEPS Contracting: Negotiation Process Manual Please complete your evaluation for Module 6 and the course overall. Page 16 | Module 6: Finalizing Selections Appendix 1 Federal and State Laws and Regulations 40USC1101-1104 (Brooks Act) (Cornell University Law School – as of January 2005) UNITED STATES CODE Title 40 – PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PROPERTY, AND WORKS Subtitle I – FEDERAL PROPERTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Chapter 11 – SELECTION OF ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS Section 1101. Policy The policy of the Federal Government is to publicly announce all requirements for architectural and engineering services and to negotiate contracts for architectural and engineering services on the basis of demonstrated competence and qualification for the type of professional services required and at fair and reasonable prices. Section 1102. Definitions In this chapter, the following definitions apply: (1) Agency head.— The term “agency head” means the head of a department, agency, or bureau of the Federal Government. (2) Architectural and engineering services.— The term “architectural and engineering services” means— (A) professional services of an architectural or engineering nature, as defined by state law, if applicable, that are required to be performed or approved by a person licensed, registered, or certified to provide the services described in this paragraph; (B) professional services of an architectural or engineering nature performed by contract that are associated with research, planning, development, design, construction, alteration, or repair of real property; and (C) other professional services of an architectural or engineering nature, or incidental services, which members of the architectural and engineering professions (and individuals in their employ) may logically or justifiably perform, including studies, investigations, surveying and mapping, tests, evaluations, consultations, comprehensive planning, program management, conceptual designs, plans and specifications, value engineering, construction phase services, soils engineering, drawing reviews, preparation of operating and maintenance manuals, and other related services. (3) Firm.— The term “firm” means an individual, firm, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity permitted by law to practice the profession of architecture or engineering. Section 1103. Selection Procedure (a) In General.— These procedures apply to the procurement of architectural and engineering services by an agency head. (b) Annual Statements.— The agency head shall encourage firms to submit annually a statement of qualifications and performance data. (c) Evaluation.— For each proposed project, the agency head shall evaluate current statements of qualifications and performance data on file with the agency, together with statements submitted by other firms regarding the proposed project. The agency head shall conduct discussions with at least 3 firms to consider anticipated concepts and compare alternative methods for furnishing services. (d) Selection.— From the firms with which discussions have been conducted, the agency head shall select, in order of preference, at least 3 firms that the agency head considers most highly qualified to provide the services required. Selection shall be based on criteria established and published by the agency head. Section 1104. Negotiation of Contract (a) In General.— The agency head shall negotiate a contract for architectural and engineering services at compensation which the agency head determines is fair and reasonable to the Federal Government. In determining fair and reasonable compensation, the agency head shall consider the scope, complexity, professional nature, and estimated value of the services to be rendered. (b) Order of Negotiation.— The agency head shall attempt to negotiate a contract, as provided in subsection (a), with the most highly qualified firm selected under section 1103 of this title. If the agency head is unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with the firm, the agency head shall formally terminate negotiations and then undertake negotiations with the next most qualified of the selected firms, continuing the process until an agreement is reached. If the agency head is unable to negotiate a satisfactory contract with any of the selected firms, the agency head shall select additional firms in order of their competence and qualification and continue negotiations in accordance with this section until an agreement is reached. Other Federal and State Laws and Regulations 23 U.S. Code §112 – Letting of Contracts https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/23/112 Texas Government Code, Chapter 2254, Subchapter A - Professional Services https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.2254.htm Texas Government Code, Chapter 2161, Subchapter F - Subcontracting https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/docs/gv/htm/gv.2161.htm Texas Government Code, Chapter 223, Subchapter B - Contract Provisions https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/TN/htm/TN.223.htm 23 Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 172 – Procurement, Management, and Administration of Engineering and Design Related Services https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-23/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-172 43 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 9, Subchapter C – Contracting for Architectural, Engineering, and Surveying Services https://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=4&ti=43&pt =1&ch=9 Appendix 2 TxDOT Ethics Policy TXDOT ETHICS POLICY I. OVERVIEW Pursuant to Section 572.051(c) of the Texas Government Code, TxDOT has adopted the following ethics policy. This ethics policy prescribes standards of conduct for all TxDOT employees. This ethics policy does not supersede any applicable federal or Texas law or administrative rule. All TxDOT employees must affirm their understanding of this policy. All TxDOT employees must abide by all applicable federal and Texas laws, administrative rules, and TxDOT conduct policies, including this ethics policy. A TxDOT employee who violates any provision of TxDOT’s conduct policies is subject to disciplinary action up to, and including, termination of the employee’s state employment or another employment-related sanction. A TxDOT employee who violates any applicable federal or Texas law or rule may be subject to civil or criminal penalties in addition to any employment-related sanction. II. STANDARDS OF CONDUCT A. An employee shall not: (1) Accept or solicit any gift, favor, or service that might reasonably tend to influence the employee in the discharge of official duties, or that the employee knows or should know is being offered with the intent to influence the employee’s official conduct; (2) Intentionally or knowingly solicit, accept, or agree to accept any benefit for having exercised his or her official powers or performed his or her official duties in favor of another; (3) Solicit, accept, or agree to accept an honorarium in consideration for services that the employee would not have been requested to provide but for the employee’s official position or duties. This does not prohibit an employee from accepting transportation and lodging expenses in connection with a conference or similar event in which the employee renders services, such as addressing an audience or engaging in a seminar, to the extent that those services are more than merely perfunctory, or from accepting meals in connection with such an event. An honorarium is a payment in the form of money or other thing of value offered in exchange for services rendered voluntarily, and is not a gift, benefit, or favor; (4) Accept other employment or compensation or engage in a business or professional activity that could reasonably be expected to impair the employee’s independence of judgment in the performance of the employee’s official duties; (5) Have a personal or financial interest, that could reasonably be expected to create a substantial conflict or even the appearance of a substantial conflict between the employee’s private interest and the public interest; (6) Utilize state time, property, facilities, or equipment for any purpose other than official state business, unless such use is reasonable and incidental and does not result in any direct cost to the state or TxDOT, interfere with the employee’s official duties, or interfere with TxDOT functions; (7) With intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, intentionally or knowingly: misuse government property, services, personnel, or any other thing of value belonging to the Employee Conduct Handbook 7 Revised April 2020 government that has come into the employee’s custody or possession by virtue of the employee’s employment; (8) Knowingly make misleading statements, either oral or written, or provide false information, in the course of official state business; (9) Engage in any political activity while on state time or utilize state resources for any political activity; (10) Have any financial or other personal interest in any real property acquired for a department project, unless the interest is openly disclosed in the public records of the department, and the employee does not participate in the acquisition on behalf of the State; (11) Copyright or patent any work the employee produces or develops as part of his or her employment with the department when the work is related to a department goal, project, or concern; or (12) Disclose confidential or sensitive business information without authorization. B. All employees shall: (1) Perform their official duties in a lawful, professional, and ethical manner; and (2) Practice responsible stewardship of department resources. Employee Conduct Handbook 8 Revised April 2020 Appendix 3 RFP Example Professional Engineering Procurement Services (PEPS) Division Solicitation Number: 601CT000000XXXX Original Posting Date: February 1, 2022 Posting Period: 21 Days REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) TO CONTRACT FOR SPECIFIC DELIVERABLE CONTRACTS FEDERAL PROCESS WITH INTERVIEW - WITH DBE GOAL 1. Solicitation: The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) intends to enter into a specific deliverable contract with prime providers pursuant to Texas Government Code, Chapter 2254, Subchapter A, and 43 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) §§9.30-9.42, to provide the following services described below. 2. Description of Services to be Provided: The PEPS Division is advertising for the following project: preparation of plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for XXXXXXX in Bexar County and the San Antonio District. Additional Information: The following files are posted as Public Files with this solicitation in the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire: • • • TxDOT Contract Template (Signature Pages, Attachment A, Attachment I) Draft - Services to be Provided by the State (Attachment B) Draft - Services to be Provided by the Engineer (Attachment C) Page 1 of 16 3. Proposal Deadline and Submittal Information: Proposal must be received prior to 1:00 p.m. CT, on Tuesday, February 22, 2022. The TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire does not permit the submission of proposals after the deadline date and time shown above. Proposals must be submitted within the TxDOT Procurement Portal In Bonfire (https://txdot.bonfirehub.com/). Proposals submitted by other means will not be considered. Once a Proposal package has been submitted in the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire, the submitter will receive a confirmation email from Bonfire. No further confirmations of receipt will be provided by TxDOT. 4. Conflict of Interest: The contract or contracts in this solicitation are subject to Texas Government Code Section 2261.252(b), which prohibits the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) from entering into contracts with certain private vendors in which certain TxDOT officers and employees have a financial interest. Each respondent shall include in its Proposal a statement that it is not prohibited from entering into a contract with TxDOT as a result of a financial interest as defined under Texas Government Code Section 2261.252(b). (Refer to Section 12- Prime Provider Firm Certification Statements of this RFP for additional information.) TxDOT requires that its prime providers and subproviders be able to work solely in TxDOT’s interest, without conflicting financial or personal incentives. TxDOT reserves the right to disqualify any prime provider or subprovider, or to place contractual limits on work or on personnel, if there is a conflict of interest that might affect or might be seen to affect the prime providers’ or subproviders’ duty to act solely in the interest of TxDOT. A conflict of interest may involve conflicting incentives with regard to the firm as a whole, or any employee. The conflict may arise between the prime provider’s or Page 2 of 16 subprovider’s work under a contract entered as a result of this solicitation and a relationship involving TxDOT, a construction contractor, another engineering firm, a materials testing firm, a third party affected by the project, a subprovider for any other consultant or contractor, or any other entity with an interest in a project on which work is performed under a contract entered as a result of this solicitation. 5. Texas Ethics Commission Requirement Notification: In 2015, the Texas Legislature adopted House Bill 1295, which added section 2252.908 of the Government Code. The law states that a governmental entity or state agency may not enter into certain contracts with a business entity unless the business entity submits a disclosure of interested parties to the governmental entity or state agency at the time the business entity submits the signed contract to the governmental entity or state agency. The law applies only to a contract of a governmental entity or state agency that either (1) requires an action or vote by the governing body of the entity or agency before the contract may be signed or (2) has a value of at least $1 million. The disclosure requirement applies to a contract entered into on or after January 1, 2016. A signed Form 1295 shall be tendered to TxDOT by the prime provider firm selected to receive a contract prior to contract execution. TxDOT will not evaluate the information provided, or respond to any questions on how to interpret the Texas Ethics Commission’s rules. For additional information, please reference the Texas Ethics Commission webpage at: https://www.ethics.state.tx.us/filinginfo/1295/ . 6. Preclusion: A preclusion has been determined for this solicitation. An entity is not eligible to participate in a contract resulting from this solicitation if that entity is participating or has participated in the design/redesign or design related services of a project listed in this solicitation. The State will not consider such an entity for an award under this solicitation. In this paragraph, the term “entity” includes prime provider and subproviders, as identified in the Preclusion Document posted with this RFP. This would include any subsidiaries and affiliates of the identified prime provider and subproviders. 7. Core Team Restrictions: This solicitation does not contain a core team restriction. 8. Work Categories and the Percent of Work Per Category: The Project Team Composition (PTC) form indicates the categories that are engineering and design related services. Refer to Section 11- Administrative Page 3 of 16 Qualification Requirements of this RFP to ensure that all requirements are met for applicable firms. Standard Work Categories: 1.8.1 Public Involvement 0.50% 2.4.3 2.13.1 U.S. Coast G. & U.S. Army Corps Of Engr. Permits Hazardous Materials Initial Site Assessment 0.50% 0.50% 2.14.1 Environmental Document Preparation 0.50% 4.2.1 Roadway Design 12.00% 4.4.1 Freeway Interchanges 11.00% 4.5.1 Constructability Review 7.00% 5.2.1 Bridge Design 12.00% 5.3.1 Multi-Level Interchange Design 11.00% 5.5.1 Bridge Class Culvert & Non-Bridge Class Culvert and Inlet Design 3.00% 7.1.1 Traffic Engineering Studies 2.00% 7.3.1 Traffic Signal Timing 2.00% 7.5.1 Intelligent Transportation System 2.00% 8.1.1 Signing, Pavement Marking & Channelization 4.00% 8.2.1 Illumination 2.00% 8.3.1 Signalization 1.00% 8.4.1 ITS Control Systems Analysis, Design & Implementation 1.00% 9.1.1 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facility Development 1.00% 10.1.1 Hydrologic Studies 4.00% 10.2.1 Roadway Hydraulic Design 3.00% 10.3.1 Bridge Hydraulic Design 2.00% 10.5.1 Bridge Scour Evaluations And Analysis 1.00% 14.1.1 Soil Exploration 1.00% 14.2.1 Geotechnical Testing 1.00% 14.3.1 Transportation Foundation Studies 2.00% 14.5.1 Evaluation & Design of Geotechnical Related Structures 4.00% 15.2.1 Design Survey 2.00% 15.2.2 Construction Survey 1.00% 18.2.1 Subsurface Utility Engineering 2.00% 18.3.1 Utility Adjustment Coordination 1.00% 18.4.1 Utility Engineering 1.00% 18.5.1 Utility Construction Management and Verification 1.00% 18.6.1 Utility Management & Coordination Oversight 1.00% Page 4 of 16 9. Precertification Requirements: Standard Work Categories: Task leaders must be precertified by the Proposal deadline date and time specified in this Solicitation for each of the advertised work categories they are identified to lead. A firm providing a task leader must have active precertification status in that category by the closing date of the solicitation. Precertification status of subprovider task leaders, by individual, can be verified through the CCIS database using the Employee Precertification Categories query tool with a CCIS employee sequence number. 10. Annual Firm Renewal Requirement: Annual renewal is governed by Section 9.33(i) of Title 43 in the Texas Administrative Code (TAC). The following is a summary of that requirement. All precertified firms must complete the annual renewal process between January 1 and March 31 each year to maintain Active status for the firm. Active status is required for prime providers and subproviders with task leaders identified for standard work categories. As applicable, firms must obtain Active status by the Proposal deadline date and time specified in this Solicitation. Active status is not required for firms proposing to perform only NLC services. Additional information on annual renewal for precertified firms is available on TxDOT’s internet web site at: http://www.txdot.gov/business/consultants/architectural-engineeringsurveying/precertification-renewal.html A list of Active precertified firms is available at: http://www.txdot.gov/business/consultants/architectural-engineering-surveying/listof-firms.html 11. Administrative Qualification Requirements: Administrative Qualification is governed by Section 9.34 of Title 43 in the Texas Administrative Code (TAC). All firms providing engineering and design-related services must be administratively qualified with an effective rate by the Proposal deadline specified in this solicitation or be determined eligible by the TxDOT PEPS Division Business Operations Center - Administrative Qualification Group to use the federal safe harbor rate by the Proposal deadline specified in this solicitation. Requirements are summarized on TxDOT’s website at the following location: http://www.txdot.gov/business/consultants/architectural-engineeringsurveying/getting-started/administrative-qualification.html. Page 5 of 16 TxDOT has published four lists that can be used to verify administrative qualification status by firm. TxDOT has also published a guidance document that gives a description of each of the four lists and the procurement processes applicable to each list. The lists and guidance document are found at the following location: https://www.txdot.gov/business/consultants/architectural-engineeringsurveying/list-of-firms.html. Administrative qualification information is for TxDOT use only. This information will only be released with the approval of the provider or as required by state or federal statute. 12. Prime Provider Firm Certification Statements: See the questionnaire posted with this solicitation in the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire as Attachment 1 Cover Page for certification information. The prime provider firm's project manager must certify that the team meets the following requirements: a. The prime provider firm and all subprovider firms performing engineering, architecture, or surveying services are registered or licensed with the appropriate State Licensing Board (Texas Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors or Texas Board of Architectural Examiners), and will maintain active status while completing any work authorizations that may result from the contract, if awarded. b. The prime provider firm and all subprovider firms are registered, as required, with the Texas Secretary of State’s office to do business in the State of Texas with the legal firm name as indicated in the questionnaire Attachment 1 Cover Page and the Attachment 3 Project Team Composition (PTC) form. c. Individuals on the project team are currently employees of either the prime provider firm or a subprovider firm that has been identified as part of the team. (Reference IRS Publication 1779 for definition of employee versus independent contractor.) d. A Professional Engineer registered or licensed in Texas will sign and seal the work to be performed on the contract. e. The prime provider firm will perform at least 30 percent of the contracted work with its own work force. f. Neither the prime provider firm nor any of the subprovider firms on the team are prohibited from entering into a contract with TxDOT as a result of a financial interest as defined under Texas Government Code Section 2261.252(b). (Refer to Section 4- Conflict of Interest of this RFP for additional information.) 13. Project Manager Requirement: The prime provider’s project manager, as proposed in the RFP response, is required to be a Professional Engineer registered or licensed in Texas by the Proposal deadline specified in this Solicitation. The project manager must be an employee of the prime provider. Page 6 of 16 14. Deputy Project Manager Requirement: This solicitation does not require a Deputy Project Manager. 15. Key Staff Requirement: Key staff are personnel who bring unique experience or are considered critical to the successful execution of the contract, exclusive of the Project Manager. Key staff may include the Deputy Project Manager (if required in the RFP), critical Task Leaders, and other personnel with significant roles on the contract. For clarification, a critical Task Leader is a task leader that the firm has determined to be key to the successful execution of the contract. 16. Project Manager Commitment: TxDOT expects the prime provider firm to commit its project manager, as proposed in the Proposal, for the duration of the contract. TxDOT further expects the project manager’s commitment to the contract to include oversight and quality assurance of the work performed under each work authorization. In selecting a provider, TxDOT evaluates the project manager’s qualifications and skills against the specific requirements and unique demands of the contract. The project manager’s commitment to the duration of the contract, therefore, is of key importance to TxDOT. Project manager replacement on an active contract, while not strictly prohibited, will require TxDOT’s prior consent. Any such replacements will be subject to the terms of the agreement. 17. Project Manager or Task Leader Replacement during Selection: TxDOT rules allow the replacement of the key personnel during the selection process as described in this section; however, the team structure must remain intact until the contract is executed (i.e. subproviders included in the Proposal cannot be replaced or removed from the team prior to contract execution). Prior to short list notification, the prime provider’s project manager (PM) may be replaced only by another prime provider staff person as approved in writing by the consultant selection team (CST). After short list notification, a PM cannot be replaced. Prior to contract execution, a task leader (TL) may be replaced by another qualified prime provider or subprovider staff person, as approved in writing by the CST Requirement for Submittal of Request by Provider: When requesting a replacement for a PM or TL, the prime provider firm must submit a letter to the Procurement Engineer with the following information: a. Certification that replacement PM is currently an employee of the prime provider firm, or that a replacement TL is currently an employee of the prime provider firm or a subprovider firm. b. The name of proposed individual and the reason for the replacement. Page 7 of 16 c. Resume of the proposed replacement including, the credentials and experience of the individual. Also include information about their licensures, precertifications, or other certifications required in the RFP or applicable NLC. d. Resume of the person being replaced. 18. Joint Response Requirements: TxDOT will not accept a joint venture or joint response teaming arrangement submission for this solicitation. 19. Employment Law: A prime provider firm or subprovider firm currently employing former TxDOT employees must be aware of the revolving door employment laws and rules, including Government Code, Chapters §572.054 and §2252.901 and Texas Administrative Code, Rules §10.6, §10.101, and §10.102. The firm and former TxDOT employees are responsible for understanding and adhering to these rules and laws. 20. E-Verify Certification: In order to comply with Executive Order RP-80, the provider must certify that for all contracts for services, the provider will, to the extent permitted by law, utilize the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s E-verify system to determine the eligibility of: a. All persons employed by provider during the term of the contract to perform duties within the State of Texas; and b. All persons, including subcontractors, assigned by provider to perform work pursuant to the contract. The attached TxDOT Contract Template reflects this certification. Information on E-Verify can be found at the following link: https://www.e-verify.gov/ 21. Title VI Assurance: The Texas Department of Transportation, in accordance with the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d to 2000d-4) and the Regulations, hereby notifies all providers that it will affirmatively ensure that any contract entered into pursuant to this advertisement, disadvantaged business enterprises will be afforded full and fair opportunity to submit Proposals in response to this invitation and will not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in consideration for an award. Page 8 of 16 22. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Goal: It is anticipated this contract will include federal funds. The assigned DBE goal for participation in the work to be performed under this contract is 16.5% of the contract amount. The prime provider firm shall furnish evidence of compliance with the assigned DBE goal or evidence of a good faith effort acceptable to TxDOT to meet the assigned goal on the Project Team Composition (PTC) form. If selected for a contract, the subprovider firms listed in the PTC form as part of the team shall be the same subprovider firms that are shown on Exhibit H-1 of the contract. The prime provider is obligated to utilize those subproviders for services that are identified as part of a Work Authorization executed under the contract. Firms listed in the PTC as DBE must be certified by the Proposal deadline specified in this solicitation. TxDOT maintains the Texas Unified Certification Program Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (TUCP DBE) Directory, which lists businesses alphabetically and by work category. The DBE goal can be achieved through a DBE prime provider or DBE subproviders. Each subprovider listed to meet the assigned DBE subcontracting goal must be DBE-certified in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code applicable to the type of service being offered by that firm that corresponds to the services being advertised in this solicitation. A subprovider that is not DBE-certified in the NAICS Code applicable to the type of service being solicited will not be counted toward the assigned DBE subcontracting goal. A listing of Precertification Work Categories and Applicable DBE NAICS Work Codes may be found at: http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/ppd/dbe-naics-codes.pdf. Additional information on the NAICS Codes can be found at: https://www.naics.com/search/. A DBE subprovider offering services included in this solicitation must be certified in the NAICS Code for the particular service(s) as shown below: • • • • • • • Engineering: 541330 Design or Construction Surveying: 541370 or 541330 for Surveying and Mapping (except Geophysical) Environmental and Environmental Inspections: 541330 for Engineering Services, or 541620 for Environmental Consulting Services Materials Testing: 541330 for Engineering Services, or 541380 for Testing Laboratories Public Involvement: 541820 or 541330 Subsurface Utility Engineering and Utility Management: 541330 for Engineering Services, and 541330 or 541618 for Utility Adjustment Coordination Traffic Counting: 541330 for Engineering Services, or 541990 for Other Professional Services Page 9 of 16 23. Selection Procedure: Providers will be short-listed based on their Proposal scores. Providers advancing to the short list will be required to participate in an interview. The interview will be held as a video teleconference if TxDOT is functioning with limited in-person contact due to safety issues. These providers will be issued an Interview and Contract Guide (ICG) containing instructions for the interview. The prime provider’s project manager must be present for and participate in the interview or the provider will be removed from further consideration. The project manager may attend only one interview. The interview will be limited to: a. The prime provider’s project manager. b. The task leaders of the following work categories: 4.2.1, 4.5.1, 5.2.1, and 18.2.1. Each Task Leader must be identified on the Project Team Composition (PTC) Form. c. One additional Task Leader, chosen at the prime provider project manager’s discretion. This Task Leader must be identified on the Project Team Composition (PTC) Form. No additional personnel may attend the interview. Interviews will be evaluated and the score will be the basis for the selection. Interviews will be conducted during the weeks of 04/04/2022 and 04/11/2022. 24. Proposal Package Submittal: The prime provider must submit the requested documents in the format specified in the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire. Each file should be named according to the following file naming convention: the prime provider firm’s legal name (limited to a maximum of the first fifteen characters)_last six digits of the Solicitation Number_Attachment X. For example, if the firm Zebra Engineering and Testing, Inc. is submitting for Solicitation 601CT0000001234 that contained five attachments, the submitted files will have the following file names: ZEBRA ENGINEERI_001234_Attachment 1.xlsx ZEBRA ENGINEERI_001234_Attachment 2.pdf ZEBRA ENGINEERI_001234_Attachment 3.pdf ZEBRA ENGINEERI_001234_Attachment 4.pdf ZEBRA ENGINEERI_001234_Attachment 5.pdf TxDOT uses a checklist to screen each Proposal package to determine if the submittal is responsive. An example of a screening checklist is provided on the external webpage under Resources. Page 10 of 16 25. Proposal Package Contents: The Proposal package submittal must consist of and is limited to the following attachments in numerical order: Attachment 1: Cover Page – The questionnaire, Attachment 1 Cover Page, posted with the solicitation must be completed and submitted as an Excel (.xlsx) file in the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire. Attachment 2: Proposal – See Section 28- Proposal Content and Section 29Proposal Format in this RFP. The Proposal must be submitted as a PDF file in the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire. The file must be submitted as a single PDF file without attachments. Attachment 3: Project Team Composition (PTC) Form (Parts 1, 2, and 3) – See the fillable file posted with this Solicitation. The PTC form must be completed and submitted as a PDF file in the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire. The file must be submitted as a single PDF file without attachments. Failure to submit all of the required parts of the PTC form in the response will result in the Proposal being considered non-responsive. a. Prime provider firm and subprovider firms listed in the Project Team Composition (PTC) form should be the legal firm names as registered with the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. b. For precertified firms, the firm name in the TxDOT CCIS database should also be the legal firm name as registered with the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. c. For Administratively Qualified firms, the firm name on the Administrative Qualification Status by Firm lists posted on the TxDOT website must either be the same as the legal name listed on the PTC form, or be the same as a dba which has been noted in the Proposal. d. A task leader identified in the Proposal should match the task leader listed on the PTC form for the same Work Category or the Proposal may be considered non-responsive. Refer to Section 17- Project Manager or Task Leader Replacement During Selection of this RFP for task leader replacement requirements. e. If more rows are needed on the PTC form to accommodate subprovider firms, contact the PEPS Procurement Engineer listed in this solicitation. (When complete, three parts will be available to print. Instructions for completing and printing Parts 1, 2, and 3 are included on Part 1, under the button labeled “Instructions”.) Attachment 4: Subprovider Contact Information – The fillable file posted with the solicitation must be completed and submitted as a PDF file in the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire. The file must be submitted as a single PDF file without attachments. In order to avoid issues with different versions of Adobe Acrobat, PEPS recommends using the "Print to PDF" function to flatten PDF files and submit as a single PDF file without attachments. Page 11 of 16 26. Evaluation Process: Proposals submitted in response to this RFP will be evaluated according to the criteria provided in Section 27- Proposal Evaluation Criteria of this RFP. The prime provider’s Evaluation Score Average (ESA) in the provider evaluation database (PS-CAMS) will be used to determine the prime provider’s past performance score at the Proposal stage according to the following table: ESA Score Past Performance Score 80 < ESA 5 60 < ESA < 80 4 40 < ESA < 60 3 20 < ESA < 40 2 No ESA will be less than 20. If a prime provider does not have a past performance score for both the project manager and the firm in the provider evaluation database, the department will use the ESA of 75.8 out of 100 points, which consists of a score of 76 for the project manager and 75 for the firm. If a prime provider has one of the scores for either the project manager or the firm in the PS-CAMS provider evaluation database, the department will use the score in the provider evaluation database plus the median score of 76 for the project manager or the median score 75 for the firm. If the project manager (PM) has a past performance evaluation in the provider evaluation database, the PM evaluation score stays with the PM regardless of current employer. Page 12 of 16 27. Proposal Evaluation Criteria: The CST members will independently score Proposals based on the evaluation criteria and relative importance factors (weightings) provided below. For a definition of Key Staff, refer to Section 15- Key Staff Requirement of this RFP. Evaluation Criteria 28. Included Elements: Weighting for Evaluation of Proposal 1 Technical Approach Project understanding, innovative concepts or alternatives 20 2 Project manager’s relevant experience Similar or related projects, project management experience 25 3 Project management planning Project staffing and resource management (who, how, and why), communication plan, quality control procedures. Also may include project scheduling or phasing for SD contracts. 15 4 Key staff’s relevant experience Experience with similar projects 28 Past Performance Score 12 Total 100 Proposal Content: The prime provider firm must use the information in the following paragraph to produce a written narrative (Proposal). The project manager identified in the Proposal must match the project manager listed on the questionnaire Attachment 1 Cover Page or the Proposal will be considered non-responsive. A task leader identified in the Proposal should match the task leader listed on the PTC form for the same Work Category or the Proposal may be considered non-responsive. Refer Page 13 of 16 to Section 17- Project Manager or Task Leader Replacement During Selection of this RFP for task leader replacement requirements. In developing the narrative, the prime provider firm should focus on the technical approach, the experience of the prime provider project manager, the planning for managing the project, and the key staff’s relevant experience (prime provider or subprovider) as they relate to the information in the following paragraphs: “Based on the information provided on the XXXX project, describe the anticipated challenges and constraints you foresee. Describe how you, the proposed project manager and your proposed team, will successfully resolve and overcome these constraints prior to letting. Provide a project example, of similar scope, design magnitude and method of delivery, which you and your proposed team have recently completed successfully. Project example will need to convey the complexity of the design, project development, and construction constraints similar to the XXXX project. How did you mitigate risks for your client? Explain how the team’s expertise and lessons learned will benefit the XXXX project. What contributed to the success of your project? Describe your team composition and the communication protocol you and your proposed team will use to discuss possible design improvements and efficiencies with the District. The project example should include, but not be limited to, the team composition, cooperation, and communication that the proposed project manager would use to successfully complete this project.” Any false statement provided by a firm may void the submitted response. TxDOT may take any additional action provided by law regarding false statements submitted as part of the solicitation. 29. Proposal Format: a. The Proposal may be no longer than 10 pages. b. Readability - It is TxDOT’s intent to allow the provider latitude in the formatting of the Proposal so that the provider may enhance the visual effectiveness of the Proposal. The Proposal may include graphics, tables, and photos within the written narrative. This latitude should not be abused (e.g., shrinking the margins and font sizes for the sole purpose of including as much content as possible) because CST members may consider how well the information is presented when scoring. TxDOT is generally interested in quality not quantity. c. The Proposal must: 1. Be legible when printed on 8.5 inches by 11 inches paper (11-point Calibri font is recommended, unreadable text will be ignored); 2. Include adequate margins (a minimum margin of 0.5 inches is recommended, text not printed due to inadequate margins will be ignored); 3. Include the prime firm name on each page; 4. Include the solicitation number on each page; and 5. Include page numbers on each page. Page 14 of 16 d. Respondent must upload the Proposal in PDF format within the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire. If the material is not presented in a readable or understandable format, it will not be scored. 30. Restrictions on Starting Final Design Due to the Environmental Process: This solicitation does not contain a restriction related to this section. 31. Contract Information: Contract execution is expected by July 2022. Contract duration is expected through August 2029. The proposed contract payment type is specified rate / lump sum / unit cost. 32. Debriefs: Requests for individual debriefs will be accommodated up to four months after contract execution. Debriefs may be requested by a proposing prime provider firm once they are notified that they are no longer in competition for the contract. A prime provider firm is no longer in competition when the proposing prime provider firm receives a notification of non-responsive proposal, when the prime provider firm receives a notification that it is not selected for the short list, or when the selection has been posted to the Selected Consultants page found at: http://www.txdot.gov/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/profserv/awards/index.htm 33. Special Accommodations: To request special accommodations pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), please notify the contact shown below, a minimum of 48 hours prior to a scheduled meeting. XXXX at XXXX@txdot.gov, using the standard subject line: Special Accommodations, Solicitation No. 601CT000000XXXX. To request special accommodations pursuant to the Language Assistance Plan (LAP) for those with limited English proficiency who need the RFP or other information translated into another language please notify the contact shown below. XXXX at XXXX@txdot.gov, using the standard subject line: Language Assistance Request, Solicitation No. 601CT000000XXXX. 34. Selection Team: The following TxDOT employees are involved in the selection process for this procurement: XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. Page 15 of 16 Note: Do not contact these individuals about this procurement. Since the procurement process has started, these TxDOT employees will not respond to questions about this procurement. To ask questions about this solicitation, please see Section 36- Questions about this Solicitation in this RFP. 35. PEPS Procurement Engineer: The PEPS Procurement Engineer for this solicitation is XXXX at XXXX@txdot.gov. 36. Questions about this Solicitation: Questions regarding this solicitation must be submitted using the Ask a Question button in the TxDOT Procurement Portal in Bonfire for this solicitation. The deadline for submitting questions regarding this Solicitation is 1:00 p.m. CT, on Monday, February 7, 2022. Significant and relevant Solicitation Questions and Answers will be posted to the Public Files for the solicitation in the TxDOT Procurement Portal by Friday, February 11, 2022. 37. Data Security Requirements: Texas Government Code §2054.138 (SB475) requires state agencies entering into a contract with a provider authorized to access, transmit, use, or store data for the agency to include a provision in the contract requiring the provider to meet the security controls the agency determines are proportionate with the agency’s risk under the contract based on the sensitivity of the agency’s data. The attached TxDOT Contract Template and Attachment I reflect this requirement. In order to comply with this regulation, providers selected for award of contracts that have higher data security risks will be required to complete a TxDOT Security Questionnaire and meet security controls identified for the contract prior to entering into negotiations for the contract. Failure to meet required security controls may result in the provider response being excluded from further consideration for the contract. Selected providers which meet the required security controls will continue with negotiations for the contract. Additional information is provided on the TxDOT Cybersecurity Resources webpage. This page also includes the TxDOT Data Classification Policy and the TxDOT Security Questionnaire. Page 16 of 16
0
advertisement
Related documents
Download
advertisement
Add this document to collection(s)
You can add this document to your study collection(s)
Sign in Available only to authorized usersAdd this document to saved
You can add this document to your saved list
Sign in Available only to authorized users